About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
, steven mufson will join us for a closer look at that. a bit later in the program, and look at the fbi's cybercrimes unit with the former fbi agent responsible for all cyber crime investigations in the u.s., shawn henry. all of that coming up after this news from c-span radio. >> making history twice within hours today, president obama became the first u.s. president to set foot in cambodia. a country once known for it its killing fields. he left behind flag-waving crowds on the streets of myanmar or downtown came to a near halt during his visit. meanwhile, unlike burma, the white house made clear that president obama is only in cambodia to attend east asia summit and said the visit should not be seen as an endorsement of the prime minister and the government he has led since the 1980's. in the middle east, the palestinian civilian death toll rose today as easterly aircraft struck densely populated areas in the gaza. the overnight airstrike on two houses belonging to an extended clan killed two children and two adults and injured 42 people, according to a gazan official. it attacked a
. the timeline shows that the fbi discovered the affair in summer. high-level officials and the justice department were notified in late summer that fbi agents had uncovered what appeared to be an extramarital affair involving the director of the agency. law enforcement officials did not notify anyone outside the fbi or justice department until last week because the investigation was incomplete and there were initial concerns about possible security breaches. host: another story from "the washington post" this morning. the headline, "probe of the petraeus investigation." we want to take you to one of those lawmakers now, congressman peter king, he was on "state of the union" this week, expressing concerns over when the fbi, the white house, and members of congress knew about the investigation. [video clip] >> i have questions about the whole matter. how to the fbi have been investigating it for this long? and if the general was involved , to me, if it was, the fbi director had the obligation to tell the head of the council at the earliest date. seems to have been going on for several mo
anyone outside the fbi or justice department until last week because the investigation was incomplete and there were initial concerns about possible security breaches. host: another story from "the washington post" this morning. the headline, "probe of the petraeus investigation." we want to take you to one of those lawmakers now, congressman peter king, he was on "state of the union" this week, expressing concerns over when the fbi, the white house, and members of congress knew about the investigation. [video clip] >> i have questions about the whole matter. how to the fbi have been investigating it for this long? and if the general was involved, to me, if it was, the fbi director had the obligation to tell the head of the council at the earliest date. seems to have been going on for several months, but now it seems the fbi did not realize it until election day? it just does not add up, you have this kind of investigation, the fbi investigating e-mails, taking four months to find out that the cia director was involved? i have real questions about this. the time line has to be analyze
of the extramarital affair he revealed in resigning from his post, a decision that came under the pressure from an f.b.i. investigation that threatened to make things even uglier, according to an intelligence community source who spoke to politico on the condition of anonymity. so tell us a little bit more, josh gerstein of the politico, tell us about this investigation by the f.b.i. and what's been the fallout so far in washington about the announcement that the general was going to resign from the c.i.a. guest: well, we still don't know too much of the detail about what was going on with the f.b.i. there are a lot of reports out there, and, in fact, it is true that part of this investigation by the f.b.i. had to do with the question of whether somebody was improperly accessing petraeus' personal email accounts. you know, however, the sources that we spoke to said that wasn't really the entirety of the investigation or the thing that really got it rolling. but at some point, for whatever reason, the f.b.i. became concerned that somebody was getting into his account. now, you can see a variety of reason
of the investigation. the f.b.i. has its own protocols in terms of how they proceed. i'm going to let director mueller and others examine those protocols and make some statements to the public generally. i do want to emphasize what i've said before. yen petraeus had an extraordinary career. he served this country with great distinction in iraq, in afghanistan, and as head of the c.i.a. by his own assessment, he did not meet the standards that he felt were necessary as the director of the c.i.a. with respect to this personal matter he's now dealing with with his family and with his wife. it's on that basis that he tendered his resignation and it's on that basis that i accepted it. but i want to emphasize that from my perspective at least, he has provided this country an extraordinary service. we are safer because of the work that dave petraeus has done and my main hope right now is that he and his family are able to move on and that this ends up being a single side note on what has otherwise been an extraordinary career. >> what about voters? do they deserve to know? >> i think you'll to sr. to talk to
on the fbi investigation going on, and i suspect questions -- fbi investigation going on, and i suspect questions about security, and why chris stevens was in the gaza without better protection -- again, those are separate -- benghazi without better protection -- but again, those are separate questions. host: north carolina. republican. you are next. caller: i think this susan rice thing is a smokescreen. you have somebody that is an ambassador and rehearses talking points, and she does not question or analyze the information, whether it is true or not. the cia says they knew this was a terrorist attack within 24 hours, and days later she is voicing the same thing, as well as president obama. consequently, it looks like the whole problem goes about her. i am a retired captain in the navy. if you do not have leadership and take responsibility, everything goes into disarray. when did the president now what was the -- know what was going on, and who gave the order for that story to be announced as far as it been an attack based on a video. there is a smokescreen going on. host: david, in a
in terms of how we are protecting our homeland. the fbi does have the law enforcement peace. those here this morning and know exactly why they have that. nsa, also known as cyber command, has the cyber command to drive the entire structure and the policies by which we are going to deploy various networks around the world. cia doesn't do that work but we can't do our work without collaborating am working with each of them. despite the fact that sometimes the matter what the news says, you do not do this alone. we do it with all our partners in the public and private sector. cia does partner with our agencies. we do, i heard a lot about for each of you, you talked about co-ops, internships, opportunities. the partner with these agencies to leverage our own employees and prospective employees to get the best match for the person. we are investing in the future and the future is you. at some point, i will find a beach somewhere but at some point, you will all be in my job. it is important for us to leverage our partners private and public to get the best officer recant for the challenges we
. our friends from the fbi were talking earlier about a number of these -- let's start with the criminal groups. organized crime, they can have a systemic content. they want to also may be pro the law enforcement sensitive systems to get information to understand what threats against them are. then there are small-time criminal operations intent on fraud or identity theft. these may be small groups or individuals. then you look at hackers, those who are just the techno geeks to do it to see if they can, go after systems not protected. then of course the hackers can be hired by any of these other -- origins to further their crimes. we have insiders, could be disgruntled employees who want to harm that information system and disrupt the company or agency's operation. or the insider could be a spy. taking that information and passing it to his or her handler and passing it to a foreign intelligence service. then we have nations and state- sponsored threats. i do not want to steal any thunder from dr. jones's presentation on chinese threats tomorrow, but i want to talk about, there were some
been under investigation by the f.b.i. it is part of a broader investigation by the accountability review board set up at the president's direction by the secretary of state. no one is more interested in getting to the bottom of what happened than the president is. no one is more interested in bringing to justice those who took the lives of four americans than the president and he is very interested in having the results of those investigations vo provided to him and the american public. >> none of that is going to talk about the? >> the president has been forth right about when he found out about it that he directed actions be taken immediately to provide support for our embassy facilities not just in benghazi but in tripoli and around the world and every action he's taken was driven by -- >> there was a 5:00 meeting but what about after that? >> the president was made aware of developments throughout the evening and days ensuing so i'm not sure what you're question is. >> there were all [indiscernible] . >> when you talk about military we've been answering questions and we'll hav
government. there'd be no embassy security new york f.b.i. agents, no food inspection, no federal prisons, no f.b.i., no head start, no aid to education. ms. moore: no fina, highway spending. mr. scott: no fema. nothing. ms. moore: except tax cuts. mr. scott: you would have to cut everything to fund tax cuts. if you extend the tax cuts without offsetting with over revenues you have to go into social security and medicare. that's why ewhen they talk about reduce the size of government that's why they can't tell you what they're going to cut. they can't cut that much. when they talk about cutting corporate loopholes, they can't tell you what they are because they don't add to that much. ms. moore: mr. scott, thanks for that background. i want to set the record straight. on the hike that the greant old party is leading us to believe, that number one extending tax cut the bush era tax cuts is not spending. it is exactly spending. and that is -- and the belief, the faulty belief that our, you know, our spending on safety net programs is driving our debt. social security does not drive the debt
trust in the fbi, cia, at home and security. i have complete trust within the confines of their agency walls. if you look at all of the botched terrorist plots that have been occurring since 9/11, it is absolutely amazing what our agencies are doing to keep us safe. who i do not trust is the white house suits who apparently put a spin on the nsa's official briefs and input on worldwide events. i believe the white house puts a political spin on everything that comes to the president, to the secretary of state. then to the american people. it was 9/11 when we had benghazi going down. that is a data i think the president would rather have nothing going down. apparently there was something going down. with petraeus, is it not ironic that he is now being the scrutinized over these extramarital affairs when he is about to testify in regards to what happened in benghazi. >>let's get a couple more comments on facebook and twitter. thank you for all of your calls. coming up next, congressman ron paul, a republican of texas set to retire. he will talk about that, the fiscal cliff, and the latest
the work of the imdwration service. >> you were turning finger prints over to the f.b.i. >> we worked with ice and turned over people when they were arrested. that is the responsibility of the federal government. we can't put that on the towns anywhere in this country. >> you can have the last word on this topic. >> there are three or four different issues. the original question was about rhode island and the drain on the resources. i've looked at that and the drain on the resources is pretty minimal because the number of undock meanted here who utilize the resources this gentleman is talking about is small, only in the dozens. so i'm not going to worry about the drain in rhode island because the numbers don't bear that out. >> what do they contribute to the economy? >> a lot of them have jobs. just because their undock meanted doesn't mean they don't work. i have a good friend who i won't name who is self-plode. he employees several americans and makes well over 100,000 a year but i have no problem with that sort of thing. i have no problem with the idea just because you're undock me
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)